In-game debates and rules disputes: What do you do about them?

[Ruavel]

For them to turn around and start making DM calls that openly contradict the RAW smacks of hypocrisy to me.

fair point... consistency is certainly something to be appreciated and possibly even expected...

 

[Telas]

So one game session, I blew up and called the game. Right in the middle of a combat. The room sat in stunned silence. "Pack it up - I mean it - I am not having fun, so leave."

Right

F'n

On!!
​

Telas

 

[Saeviomagy]

Sometimes the DM is wrong.

Sometimes a player is wrong.

It only becomes a problem when one of them is pigheaded about it.

If that person is you, stop it.

 

[the Jester]

I DM a game now and we lost one player primarily over rules disputes. Since then, the game has been *far* more peaceful and much easier on me and also the other players. I learned a huge lesson from the experience, and that is just ONE player can derail an entire group and campaign and you should always be very careful with who you let into your games.

Amen, brother. Had the same experience- the guy was a very long term player imc, and a friend for years, but in the end he wasn't worth the hassle. When he stopped coming to the game (of his own volition) every player in the group came to me within two months and mentioned how much better the game was without him!

That said, there are still times where players disagree with rulings, which is fine, but occasionally the disputes become heated and the player(s)/DM alike become frustrated and the fun factor drops considerably.... I'm just curious to know how you deal with it?

Make a ruling, move on, review and discuss later.

I allow about 3-5 minutes for discussion if it's a big deal. Otherwise, eh, 1 minute and get over it. If it's life or death for a pc or important npc, I'm prone to give a lil more time for looking it up or whatever, but the game must continue. If the spice does not flow, disaster falls on everyone.

 

[Telas]

Sometimes the DM is wrong.

Sometimes a player is wrong.

It only becomes a problem when one of them is pigheaded about it.

If that person is you, stop it.

If you keep talking sense like that, these boards will dry up.

Telas

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Speaking as a rules lawyer -- in both the positive and negative connotations of the phrase -- I believe you just can't allow any kind of protracted debate while the game in ongoing. It's too disruptive. Whoever is right or wrong, the argument does more harm to enjoyment for everybody than all but the most egregious rules flubs.

For myself as a player, I've reached a compromise between my guilt at interfering with another DM and my slightly control-freakish nature: I'll say, once, "The official rule is ... " I don't push it farther than that, even if I know I'm right, unless the DM asks me to point to the rule.

As a DM, I expect the same courtesy. (With one exception, my players are far less rules-lawyerly than I am, so it's rarely a problem.) I have a table rule that folks can have 30 seconds to find a rule, and after that my ruling stands until after the game. I relax that a bit for situations involving immediate peril to characters, however.

Email is almost custom made for discussing rulings outside the game. (Unfortunately, the one player I mentioned above can't argue via email to save his life, so I don't get to use it for that purpose as much as it could be used.)

 

[Ranes]

I've only ever had one problem player. He whinged and whined at every ruling I made against him or the party at large. He had no interest in learning the rules but would criticise me for not wanting to change them. Yep, this player wasn't saying I was wrong in my interpretation of the rules, only that I was wrong for applying them where they had a negative effect on what he or the party wanted to attempt. He never appreciated those moments where rulings went in his favour. He would speak to me outside the game and tell me how unhappy all the other players were with my DMing (and that I was the worst DM he had ever known). The last time he played with us, I made a ruling that had a significantly negative effect on the players and he let rip. But when he turned to the other players for support, he got none. In fact, one of the other players said to him, "In my other group, this wouldn't even merit discussion."

It really does only take one person (player or DM) to derail things. Now my ex-problem player has moved on to pastures new, we just don't have issues any more. We do have interruptions regarding my rulings but I'm lucky; these are all polite and brief.

"Are you sure about that?"

"Why's that?"

"I thought..."

I actually feel supported by my players, because of the way they challenge me if they think I'm wrong. And on those occasions where they've been able to quickly point out my error, I've been as quick to take the correction on board. In other words, I don't feel defensive.

I guess the best bet is to explain to players up front that you want to keep rules challenges in-game to a minimum and have an established protocol for dealing with them. There will be those who agree to these table rules but then ignore them when the game gets underway but, once they make themselves known to me, I cut them no slack, because of the effect I know they have on the whole group. I'll remind someone a couple of times how I like to handle disputes. If they can't adapt after that, they're gone.

 

[Thanee]

If the DM forgets something or makes an obvious error, and a player points that out (which I consider the right thing to do), it's usually quickly changed (also retroactively, if it has just happened).

Lenghty discussions have no place on the table, however. That's what email and the time before/after a game session is for. If someone is not happy with a particular rule or ruling, we usually find a compromise then, or the player just has to live with it, if it's not a particulary strong issue. Never really had a problem like this, tho, as most of us think fairly similar about most issues.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Agreed..

Lengthy in game debates are to be avoided.. unfortunatly you occassionally run into a player/DM that refuses to comprehend the 'keep the game going and worry later' concept.

I have one such player now. He really is not all that bad.. just doesn't always grasp a rule and will argue vehemetly against a ruling that he does not get..... even when its RAW, in black and white in front of him.

I hope that, in allowing him to continue to play, he will learn to keep those debates off-screen and work on knowing at least the rules that apply to his character.

I also have ancedotal comments on the other side of the fence. In a CP2020 game I ran, I made a really illogical call after a player got really skilled at playing the stock market. I ruled that the market closed to non-corperate entities. The player worked in the banking industry.... He accepted the ruling and drove on. Later that week, he explained to me how the market works and that it could not close.. and also agreed to stop doing leveraged buy-outs instead of breaking into places...

Anyway, try to work with the debate off camera if you can. If not, stop play and avoid heated arguments in favor of discussion. If heated arguments arise.. before you become to heated.. call the game until you can determine the correct answer.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I no longer participate in either of these issues during gaming. If either need to discussed at length it happens at the end of the session, even if that means the session ends prematurely.

It just drains any suspension of disbelief and for what? Usually it amounts to nothing.